The brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.Order Now
AILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 15030212 | Dated March 2, 2015 | File Size: 664 KDownload the Document
On March 2, 2015, AILA submitted a statement for the record to the House Judiciary Committee opposing H.R. 1148, the “Michael Davis, Jr. in Honor of State and Local Law Enforcement Act,” which is scheduled for markup this week. H.R. 1148 resurrects the discredited “SAFE Act” from the 112th Congress and additionally defunds the implementation of much of the President’s November 2014 executive action. It seeks to undo the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. U.S. by allowing 50 different states and thousands of localities to enact and enforce their own immigration laws. It criminalizes mere unlawful presence, taking the very approach adopted in the notorious H.R. 4437 (Rep. Sensenbrenner R-WI) that sparked massive nonviolent protests in 2005. The bill's only answer to the brokenness of our immigration system, our statement says, is a deport-them-all strategy which has been widely discredited by Republican and Democratic leaders. The severity of the enforcement-only provisions contained in H.R. 1148 is fundamentally inconsistent with principles of due process and fairness grounded in the Constitution. H.R. 1148 will hurt hundreds of thousands of Dreamers, families, businesses and the U.S. economy.
[[To print the PDF on this page please use the print function in the PDF reader.]]
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 15030212.Open the Document
American Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.